Is anyone else like this?

[Olgar Shiverstone]

My wife is like that -- one-time only for everything. I on the other hand love to re-read/re-watch -- I get a little more out of things each time, and it's like visiting with olds friends.

Makes choosing entertainment for the two of us fun, though.

Spouse: "You're watching The Two Towers again?!"

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

I'm a very fast reader to begin with and on a second pass through when I fall into the rythem of it, rereading one of my fantasy books is no more of a time investment than popping in a dvd would be...

Yes but this most likely makes you more of an exception rather than the norm.

I find it impossible to imagine that you can draw all the value out of any serious work of art in one pass.

Sure, you can draw more value out of a book in subsequent readings, but for my own purposes at least I find much more value in completely new works. As I said above there are exceptions, though (Wolfe). It's the diminishing law of returns. Do I go back for the extra 10% I might get out of a re-reading, or do I try something new, which could potentially become one of my favorites.

What a lot of people seem to be coming back to is that they re-read for comfort. I guess I'm less into comfort and more into broadening my exposure and trying new things. I probably would rewatch movies less as well if there was more good stuff out there.

Question for you re-readers, what general percentage of your re-reading is new, and what percentage is re-reads?

 

[barsoomcore]

Sure, you can draw more value out of a book in subsequent readings, but for my own purposes at least I find much more value in completely new works. As I said above there are exceptions, though (Wolfe). It's the diminishing law of returns. Do I go back for the extra 10% I might get out of a re-reading, or do I try something new, which could potentially become one of my favorites.

See, what I've found in fantasy over the past fifteen years is that the diminishing returns have been on the side of the NEW material. Most new fantasy is crap. 99% would be my first guess, probably to be trended upward with more investigation.

So it's generally better worth my time to re-read Brust than it is to take a chance on some untried writer. That 10% I get on the re-read is still more absolute value than the 100% I get from most new books.

But then again, I don't think I agree with that 10% valuation. Often I find that a re-read provides MORE value than the initial pass -- so far from being 10% of the original value I'm getting 150% or more, as my deeper exploration reveals previously unseen depths.

And that's with Brust, who while a fine, fine writer isn't, say, Shakespeare or Keats or even Anne Carson -- any of whom one can read pretty much endlessly, deriving massive value each time. Certainly much more than by reading crappy fantasy novels.

What a lot of people seem to be coming back to is that they re-read for comfort. I guess I'm less into comfort and more into broadening my exposure and trying new things.

Broad exposure is good. So is deep investigation. A good education includes both -- the balance needing determination by each individual.

I probably would rewatch movies less as well if there was more good stuff out there.

See? We have flipped notions on movies vs. novels. For me, new movies are likely to be worth my time even if they're not all that great. Whereas crappy novels provide me almost no value at all.

Maybe part of that is that I spent, say the first thirty years of my life thinking about how to write stories, so I know most of the pitfalls into which bad stories fall. It's rare that I read a bad novel and find the reasons for its crappiness interesting. Whereas I've only spent about ten years thinking about how to make a movie, so even bad movies can often teach me stuff -- I haven't nearly explored all the ways in which a movie can fail.

But percentages:

Reading -- 50/50 re-read and new
Movies -- 30/70 re-view and new

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Hmmm, wow a lot of re-readers. I admit, i can re-read certan parts of a book. But never the whole book itself. I am going to start another topic soon, it is related to books too. So look for it.

 

[Kesh]

I re-read and re-view all the time. Though my entire reading volume has dropped significantly in the past few years... I have a stack of new books sitting here next to me I need to go through. Gah. Need more time in the day...

 

[The_lurkeR]

I'm surprised at the number of re-readers also, since I never do it myself.

I think the reason though has been sorted out though in this thread. It seems like the speed readers are the ones who re-read.

I read quite slowly, I think because of a tendancy to linger and absorb every detail. Like Slash, once it's read it's etched in my head and any attempt to reread becomes boring as I can recall the book quicker in my mind than reread the text. It feels like a waste of time compared to reading/learning something new.

Maybe the other 1-timers can verify this as well? If I read a book where you can predict what's going to happen next it becomes as boring as a re-read and dropped.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Maybe the other 1-timers can verify this as well? If I read a book where you can predict what's going to happen next it becomes as boring as a re-read and dropped.

It is the same thing for me. One i start reading it again, i know what is going to happen next. And thus, it becomes rather boring.

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

I think the reason though has been sorted out though in this thread. It seems like the speed readers are the ones who re-read.

Eh, we have? Based on a single person's comments?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I read quite slowly, I think because of a tendancy to linger and absorb every detail. Like Slash, once it's read it's etched in my head and any attempt to reread becomes boring as I can recall the book quicker in my mind than reread the text. It feels like a waste of time compared to reading/learning something new.

I can't agree with that.

There are books I've read so many times I can quote large portions from memory. And I still enjoy rereading them.

There are movies where I can beat the characters to every line of dialogue. And I still enjoy watching them.

Knowing what's going to happen next might dilute some of the impact, and it ruins stories that rely on suspense and mystery. But that leaves a whole lot of books out there that provide reliable entertainment over and over.

-Hyp.

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

See, what I've found in fantasy over the past fifteen years is that the diminishing returns have been on the side of the NEW material. Most new fantasy is crap. 99% would be my first guess, probably to be trended upward with more investigation.

In my reading, I avoid this by:
1) Doing a lot of research on the net for any new authors before buying
2) Sticking with known-quanty authors
3) Not just reading fantasy, or even genre lit helps ensure that there is a broader pallete from which to choose

But then again, I don't think I agree with that 10% valuation. Often I find that a re-read provides MORE value than the initial pass -- so far from being 10% of the original value I'm getting 150% or more, as my deeper exploration reveals previously unseen depths.

Hmm... I don't know. Above you say that in your first reading you just read to get a general idea of the plot and to decide if a book is worth it. Personally I tend to ruminate a lot while I'm reading. This is also related to speed reading. A lot of people I know who speed read (such as my mother) have very low retention and it is obvious they haven't put a lot of thought into it. (KB, I'm not saying this applies to all speed readers... Just to many I've known.) Of course depending on the book my pages/hour fluxuates. Some I like to savour the flavor of the description, stop to consider the full emotional impact of a scene, or even flip back in the book and reread a bunch of pages when you get a new insight (as often happens with Wolfe).

Barsoomcore you seem to be doing a lot of literary analysis from a writers viewpoint, and actually in that case I can see going back to suck more marrow from the bones to enhance your own understanding of the craft. But again, I would guess that's not a typical reason.

Maybe part of that is that I spent, say the first thirty years of my life thinking about how to write stories, so I know most of the pitfalls into which bad stories fall. Heh, I don't think I read bad stuff all that often It's rare that I read a bad novel and find the reasons for its crappiness interesting.

As I said above I don't think I read that much bad stuff at all. See above. It's not like I'm walking down the aisles and buying randomly shotgun style.

Anyway, I'm sufficiently intrigued by this whole issue to try rereading a couple of books. Maybe the first couple of Erikson books since the fifth is due soon.